1. David Salafsky, MPH Carlos Moll, MPH The University of Arizona
Comparison of an In-Class vs. Online Alcohol Diversion Program for College Students: Findings from a 2-year study
David Salafsky, MPH Carlos Moll, MPH
The University of Arizona

2. In-class Format 6 hour class (3 sessions over 3 weeks)
Average class size = 15 students
Participatory
5 different instructors
Standard lesson plan, with potential for variation due to discussion and instructor

3. Online Format Third Millennium Classrooms “Under the Influence”
2-3 hours to complete
Conducted individually online anywhere
No potential for content variability

4. In-class Content Standard drinks BAC calculation Alcohol in the body
Physiological effects
Moderation skills/Protective strategies
Normative feedback
Negative consequences

5. Online Content e-CHUG Levels of alcohol use Alcohol and other drugs
BAC calculation
Consequences of misuse
Tools for change

6. Evaluation Methods Random assignment Consent
Baseline (in-person for both groups)
3-month online follow-up
Incentives - $20 gift card

7. Survey Instrument Demographics Alcohol consumption measures
Protective factors
Stages of change
Norms perceptions
Negative consequences

8. Sample Diversion referrals from Residence Life & Dean of Students
Total diversion referrals:
Online = 537
In-class = 504
Total baseline: Online = 430 (80.1% of baselines)
In-class = 449 (89.1% of baselines)
Total matched pairs:
Online = 264 (64.7% of baselines)
In-class = 286 (71.3% of baselines)

9. Demographics 63% Male Average age = 19 80% Live in residence halls
78% Freshmen
83% Caucasian
28% Greek affiliation
No significant differences between groups

10. Outcomes Both formats effective Significant increase in:
Protective behaviors
Significant reductions in:
Usual # drinks
Nights they party
Perception of peer drinking
Negative consequences

11. Modality Comparisons

12. Frequency of 5 or more drinks
Online
In-class
Pre
Post
p-value
% 1-2 times
52.0
59.4 ns
46.0
66.1
.000
% 3-5 times
33.1
31.5
39.6
24.7
% 6 or more
14.9
9.1
14.4

13. Comparing of Heavy Drinkers
Defined as usually having > 6 drinks when they party
Approximately half of each group
Programming focuses on harm and risk reduction
Higher risk group

14. Alcohol Use in Heavy Drinkers
All drinking behaviors improved for both online and in-class groups:
Drinks per week
Drinks they usually have when they party
Drinks last time they drank
Drinks per hour last time they drank
BAC last time they drank

15. Protective Factors in Heavy Drinkers
Significant improvements for the in-class group only

16. Significant improvements for the in-class group only

17. Significant improvements for the in-class group only

18. Significant improvements for the in-class group only
* Based on women who usually have 5 or more drinks

19. Significant improvements for the in-class group only

20. Negative Consequences in Heavy Drinkers
Significant improvements for the in-class group only

21. Significant improvements for the in-class group only

22. Significant improvements for the in-class group only

23. Significant improvements for both groups

24. Significant improvements for both groups

25. Significant improvements for both groups

26. Limitations No control over online content
Differences other than modality
Multiple in-class instructors
Difficulty with follow-up
Relatively short follow-up period (3 months)

27. Lessons Learned Both formats were effective
In-class had more impact on:
Frequency of heavy drinking & BAC
Protective behaviors
Heavy drinkers as a group

28. Next Steps
Based on evaluation, online component (e-CHUG) was added to in-class format
Develop online curriculum based on in-class components
Continue evaluation of revised diversion programming

29. Contact Information
David Salafsky
Carlos Moll